Original Insight

Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations* as shared in leading electronic discovery publications, posts and discussions over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup** shares general market sizing estimates for the combined software and services area of the electronic discovery market for the years between 2014 and 2019.

Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations as shared in leading electronic discovery reports, publications and posts over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup shares general worldwide market sizing considerations for software and services in the electronic discovery market for the years between 2014 and 2019.

Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations* as shared in leading electronic discovery publications, posts and discussions over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup** shares general market sizing estimates for the services area of the electronic discovery market for the years between 2014 and 2019.

Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations as shared in leading electronic discovery reports, publications and posts over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup shares general worldwide market sizing considerations for services in the electronic discovery market for the years between 2014 and 2019.

As part of the eDiscovery process, legal professionals typically use a combination of talent, technology, and techniques to do tasks ranging from preservation to production of electronically stored information. Many of the most often used technologies in this process come in the form of eDiscovery software.

That a special master would be required to help the parties – where they entered into a predictive coding use protocol – seems counterintuitive and underscores the need for counsel to proceed with caution before agreeing to such protocols.

On a strictly relevance based review of 90,000 documents (after keyword filtering, which implies a multimodal approach to TAR), the TAR approach was over $57,000 less expensive ($136,225 vs. $193,500 for manual review).